Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context about how the output should NOT be consumed downstream, which is useful guidance not present in the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and each subsequent sentence earning its place by adding a usage condition or a downstream warning. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only catalog listing with full parameter documentation and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and a key downstream caveat. It could optionally mention pagination or result size, but nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both 'search' and 'category' are fully documented in the schema itself. The description implies search-by-existence but adds no syntax, matching behavior, or category semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Browse the Helm chart catalog'), making the operation immediately clear. It hints at differentiation from design_stack via the downstream-usage warning, though it does not explicitly contrast with the closest siblings like list_chart_versions or get_chart_details, which also operate on the chart catalog.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('verify a specific chart exists or to show the user what's available') and an explicit when-not / how-not ('Do NOT pass these results as bulk requirements to design_stack'). This routes the agent on both discovery and downstream consumption.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.